Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: hmmmz.... winamp question.... (Read 4450 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

yup...


what verdict has winamp.. got from HA.... 2x/3...

interested to know, first time i installed WA.. i was not to impressed...
but know am looking after a basic (multi-format) player..
(have tryed some.. but they turned out to bee.. big resource hogs..)

a. is WA the best there is..

b. what about WA qualety in enc/decoding.. compared to the manual way.

>recomandations.?.?.:




hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #1 –
Maybe it's because I'm not a native speaker, but: ???
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #2 –
a)
Winamp seems to be the player that are most supported by different formats and most ppl here use it.
Plugin development usually go to winamp first.
Any other players with none-broken playback should give same quality.


b)
There have been no reports about winamps output being bad...so you can conclude that it's fine.

Though many ppl believe the MAD plugin gives better quality with mp3.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #3 –
recomandations:

Smirnoff Ice

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #4 –
Quote
Originally posted by Jan S.
recomandations:

Smirnoff Ice


yup...

TnX.. for ya reply jan..

nope.. i stick with my single malt....


hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #5 –
I'd suggest looking at coolplayer - takes less than half the memory of winamp, and less processor time.  Doesn't have the same range of formats, but does cover ogg and mp3 which is enough for me!

http://coolplayer.sourceforge.net

Cheers, Paul

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #6 –
Quote
Originally posted by verloren
I'd suggest looking at coolplayer - takes less than half the memory of winamp, and less processor time.  Doesn't have the same range of formats, but does cover ogg and mp3 which is enough for me!

I usually don't get involved with talks about Winamp vs other players, but I had to comment this.
Winamp with 18 input plugins, few output plugins and one general purpose plugin (AlbumList) playing mp3 album uses ~3 MB memory, CoolPlayer with default config playing same album uses ~6 MB memory. When Winamp is minimized, memory usage drops to ~1.5 MB, minimized CoolPlayer still uses ~6 MB. Both players consume 0% of CPU power, so it's difficult to compare them in that area.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #7 –
On WinXP, WinAmp takes 8.3 Mb for mp3 and 9 Mb for ogg, while CoolPlayer takes 5.7 Mb for mp3 and 6.6 Mb for ogg for the same songs...
One Ring to rule them all
One Ring to find them
One Ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them
        "J.R.R.Tolkien"

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #8 –
Case,

I'm surprised by your WinAmp vs Coolplayer results.  When I was using it (on win2k) a basic installation, no plugins, no visualization, not even playing a tune, it used 9MB (or similar - it's been a while since I used 2.x)  v3.0 similarly configured used 12MB and up.  Coolplayer for me uses around 6-7MB when playing.

I agree the processor time is a relatively small difference, but WinAmp still used more - it could typically be seen using 2-3% of my 1.2GHz processor.  Coolplayer rarely shows up as using any, it's only the accumulated time that shows it was there at all.  Not a major difference, but handy on slower machines.

I'm not doubting what you say at all, but I am surprised by such variation, and wonder what explains it.

Cheers, Paul
btw, the one area where Coolplayer falls down (for me) is that it takes ages to load (e.g. 30+ seconds)  Happily I only start it once per day!

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #9 –
[blah]
IMO comparing "memory usage" is pointless, at least while doing it the way you seem to do. try measuring after using each player for a few hours (so unused stuff gets paged out to disk), then you will get how much physical memory the player actually uses during normal operation (its usually less than immediately after load). i really dont get the point of arguing about 1 or 2 megs of memory usage when average sold computer these days has 256megs, and win2k/xp OS's don't have any trouble handling low-memory situations without screwing with running programs.
about CPU usage - it's 0% on my athlon700 when playing mp3s with default mp3 decoder and directsound. obviously goes to 2-4% when i switch to waveout (because of the way win2k waveout works, its waveout not winamp taking CPU). and again, i don't see the point of comparing this, since it's virtually impossible for an average user to notice the difference without using the task manager (and if some other program humps the CPU, winamp and any other players will get interrupted in the same way no matter how speedy they are).
[/blah]
Microsoft Windows: We can't script here, this is bat country.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #10 –
Peter's reply pretty much explained the memory usage differences. It's not even necessary to wait to see the memory use drop, after minimize memory use is low and stays low.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #11 –
all i know is, on my ten-year-old laptop, coolplayer ran, but winamp didn't. on a not-so-old computer i don't think there are any differences with the playback.

it just occurred to me that i don't know how to turn clipping protection on in coolplayer. is it a MAD decoder thing, or is it just a MAD-on-winamp decoder thing?

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #12 –
Quote
Originally posted by shimage
it just occurred to me that i don't know how to turn clipping protection on in coolplayer. is it a MAD decoder thing?

Take a look at MP3gain. It's a different approach but it can help to get rid of clipping of mp3's, no matter what player/decoder you'll use.
--
Ge Someone
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #13 –
yup...


Quote
Originally posted by Guardian
On WinXP, WinAmp takes 8.3 Mb for mp3 and 9 Mb for ogg, while CoolPlayer takes 5.7 Mb for mp3 and 6.6 Mb for ogg for the same songs...


have tryed 4. different versions of XP..
didn`t do it for me.. just a big showoff..... + lot`s of hazle..

1. pc running slimm 98se..
1. pc running slimm 2k pro.

xp is forbidden... yay..

 

hmmmz.... winamp question....

Reply #14 –
Quote
Originally posted by n68
yup...




have tryed 4. different versions of XP..
didn`t do it for me.. just a big showoff..... + lot`s of hazle..

1. pc running slimm 98se..
1. pc running slimm 2k pro.

xp is forbidden... yay..



I'm use it with Windows Classic Style so there's no such thing like big showoff and it works fine for me
One Ring to rule them all
One Ring to find them
One Ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them
        "J.R.R.Tolkien"